To pull or not to pull

Subscribe (Full Service)


	Search: The ACM Digital Library The Guide

	Feedback

To pull or not to pull

Full text

Pdf (448 KB)

Source

Conference on Object Oriented Programming Systems Languages and Applications archive
Proceeding of the 24th ACM SIGPLAN conference companion on Object oriented programming systems languages and applications table of contents

Orlando, Florida, USA

SESSION: Onward! innovation in progress papers table of contents

Pages 889-894

Year of Publication: 2009

ISBN:978-1-60558-768-4

Authors

Andrea Janes	Free University of Bolzano/Bozen, Bolzano, Italy
Giancarlo Succi	Free University of Bolzano/Bozen, Bolzano, Italy

Sponsor

SIGPLAN: ACM Special Interest Group on Programming Languages

Publisher

ACM New York, NY, USA

Bibliometrics

Downloads (6 Weeks): 13, Downloads (12 Months): 13, Citation Count: 0

Additional Information:

abstract references index terms

Tools and Actions:	Request Permissions Review this Article Save this Article to a Binder Display Formats: BibTeX EndNote ACM Ref

DOI Bookmark:	Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1639950.1640052 What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

The Toyota Production System promotes "pull" scheduling to reduce the production of parts that do not comply to what the customer needs. The use of "pull" within software represents a radical change in the way activities are planned. This article gives two examples of the possible application of "pull" within software engineering and de-scribes a measurement tool to assess the current costs and amount of rework within a software development project. The described approach aims to help practitioners to under-stand whether to use "pull" or "push" in their organizations.

REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

	1	Basili, V. R., and Rombach, H. D. 1994. "Goal Question Metric Paradigm" in Encyclopedia of Software Engineering. Volume 1. John Wiley & Sons.
	2	Basili, V. R., Condon, S. E., El Emam, K., Hendrick, R. B., and Melo W. 1997. Characterizing and Modeling the Cost of Rework in a Library of Reusable Software Components. International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 282, 19th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE'97)
	3	BBC News. "Toyota 'world's largest carmaker'." BBC News, 24 April 2007, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6586679.stm (accessed June 10, 2009)
	4	Beck, K. 1999. Extreme Programming Explained: Embrace Change. Addison-Wesley Professional.
	5	Beck, K. 2003. Test Driven Development By Example (Addison-Wesley Signature Series). Addison-Wesley Professional
	6	Boehm, B. W. 2007. Software engineering: Barry W. Boehm's lifetime contributions to software development, management, and research, ed. Richard W. Selby, Wiley-IEEE, ISBN 047014873X, 9780470148730
	7	Chua, B. B., Bernardo, D. V., Verner, J. 2008. Criteria for Estimating Effort for Requirements Changes. Software Process Improvement, Communications in Computer and Information Science, Volume 16. ISBN 978-3-540-85934-5. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 2008, p. 36
	8	de Bruin, H. and van Vliet, H. 2003. Quality-driven software architecture composition. J. Syst. Softw. 66, 3 (Jun. 2003), 269--284.
	9	Erdogmus, H. 2007. A cost effectiveness indicator for software development. First International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM 2007)
	10	Erdogmus, H., Morisio, T. 2005. On the Effectiveness of Test-first Approach to Programming. Proceedings of the IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 31(1). January 2005.
	11	Fairley, R.E., Willshire, M.J., 2005. Iterative rework: the good, the bad, and the ugly. Computer, vol.38, no.9, pp. 34--41, Sept. 2005
	12	Kiew, L. Y., Mashkuri, Y. and Ow, S.H. 2002. QualPro-RP -- An Error Management And Rework Effort Measurement Tool. Malaysian Journal of Computer Science 15(1), June 2002: 68--76.
	13	Kniberg, H. 2009. "One day in Kanban land." Henrik Kniberg's Blog, entry June 26, 2009, http://blog.crisp.se/henrikkniberg/2009/06/26/1246053060000.html (accessed August 8, 2009)
	14	Lavazza, L. and Valetto, G. 2000. Requirements-Based Estimation of Change Costs. Empirical Softw. Engg. 5, 3 (Nov. 2000), pp. 229--243.
	15	Munson, J.C., Elbaum, S.G. 1998. Code Churn: A Measure for Estimating the Impact of Code Change. icsm, pp.24, 14th IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance (ICSM'98)
	16	New York Times. "Toyota Motor Corporation." New York Times Topics, http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/toyota_motor_corporation/index.html (accessed June 10, 2009).
	17	Ouchi, W.G. 1977. "The Relationship Between Organizational Structure and Organizational Control," Administrative Science Quarterly (22:1), March 1977, pp 95--113.
	18	Papadopoulos, G. A. and Arbab, F. 1998 Coordination Models and Languages. Technical Report. UMI Order Number: SEN-R9834., CWI (Centre for Mathematics and Computer Science).
	19	Poppendieck, M. 2007. Lean Software Development. International Conference on Software Engineering Companion, pp. 165--166, 29th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE'07 Companion)
	20	Poppendieck, M., Poppendieck, T. 2003. Lean Software Development: An Agile Toolkit for Software Development Managers. Addison--Wesley.
	21	Royal Academy of Engineering. 2004. The Challenges of Complex IT Projects: The Report of a Working Group from the Royal Academy of Engineering and the British Computer Society. Study presented at the International Conference of Software Engineering, May 26, in Edinburgh, Scotland, UK
	22	Schnabel, I., Pizka, M. 2006. Goal--Driven Software Development. SEW. 2006. IEEE Computer Society.
	23	Shneiderman, B. 1992. Tree visualization with tree-maps: 2-d space-filling approach. ACM Trans. Graph. 11, 1 (Jan. 1992), 92--99.
	24	Womack, J. P., Jones, D. T. 1996. Lean thinking, New York, NY, USA: Simon and Schuster.